TX-32: Sessions Defends Extreme Teabagger Rhetoric

Excuse me if I get a bit emotional, but I couldn't be more ashamed that Pete Sessions represents my congressional district (TX-32) than I am now.
It's bad enough that Sessions dishonestly claims that healthcare reform has been rejected by the American people when in fact poll after poll shows the completely opposite conclusion. It's also bad enough that Sessions has opposed anything that represents real progressive change in this country, including the Employee Free Choice Act.
Now Sessions has, in effect, allied with those who have toted guns during presidential events and have made hints of violence in placards seen during last week's teabagger protests.
Folks have a right to express their opinions, including those that strongly disagree with President Obama's policies and those of the Democratic leadership. But when my area's representative who also happens to be one of the main House Republicans made the statements that he did, it requires more than just mere comment. It requires that strong action be made to assure his defeat next year.
Sessions made the comments in response to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's stated concerns about the extreme and sometimes violent rhetoric that has been heard across the nation during the past month or so if not beyond.
Here is what Pelosi said and the question that triggered the speaker's response:

Q: Madam Speaker, in terms of the political tone, the tone of the debate, Hoyer said earlier this week he thought it was the most vitriolic since '93-'94. And around that time we also saw acts of domestic violence, domestic terrorism. How concerned are you about the tone of the political debate, in terms of people talking about anti-government rhetoric and so on and the possibility of violence?
Speaker Pelosi: Well, I think we all have to take responsibility for our actions and our words. We are a free country, and this balance between freedom and safety is one that we have to carefully balance.
I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this, myself, in the late '70s in San Francisco (when then-Mayor George Moscone and County Supervisor Harvey Milk were assassinated). This kind of rhetoric was very frightening, and it created a climate in which violence took place.
So I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made, so that understanding that some of the people -- the ears that it is falling on are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume.
But, again, our country is great because people can say what they think and they believe. But I also think that they have to take responsibility for any incitement that they may cause.

As one who was horrified when a junior high school teacher interupted a nutrition period with his announcement of President Kennedy's assassination in 1963 and was equally in shock when the killings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968 were announced, I understand what Pelosi meant and the need that now exists to tone down the rhetoric so reasoned debate can prevail and all viewpoints can be heard.
But even after some folks were seen with weapons at presidential events and some placards seen at teabagger protests hinted at violence, Sessions seemed to turn a deaf ear to that. Instead, he irresponsibly blamed Pelosi for expressing her concerns.
Here's what Sessions said:

"The Speaker is now likening genuine opposition to assassination. Such insulting rhetoric not only undermines the credibility of her office, but it underscores the desperate attempt by her party to divert attention away from a failing agenda," Sessions said in a statement. "During one of the most important policy debates of our time, the American people have been completely abandoned by those elected representatives under her control. Voters are justifiably frustrated with Washington, and the Speaker's verbal assault on voters accomplishes nothing other than furthering her reputation for being wildly out of touch with the American people."

It's bad enough that Sessions showed his fact-deafness toward public sentiment on healthcare reform, as witnessed by recent polls showing SUPPORT of real reform that includes a robust public option, but when he misstates what Pelosi said and even defends those who have displayed placards such as the ones alluding to violence against our leaders, it calls into serious question whether he is truly fit to represent my district in anything, even dog catcher.
I was grieved enough after both Kennedys and Dr. King were killed, and I was also saddened when Moscone and Milk were killed. Sessions' statements justifying the actions of those protesting President Obama (including those hinting of gun violence) are totally unworthy of the office he was elected to in my district.
Putting it mildly, Pete Sessions doesn't speak for me, and I hope that more than just rhetoric is used to condemn him. It's time to hit him hard where it can really hurt, by helping to fund a strong opponent who can really take the fight to him next year.
Pete Sessions may think that we'll forget the despicable things he said when election time comes next year, but this latest comment is too much for me and I suspect many others to take. Putting it mildly, this scumbag must be retired from office with a resounding election defeat in November of 2010.
NOTE: MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had an excellent report on what Pelosi said and Sessions' irresponsible response during her Thursday newscast. In case you missed it, here's the story:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Daily Kos Poster Tells It Like It Is On What's Nazi and What's Not

This is one of the most insightful stories I have seen of the efforts by Republicans, their allied right-wing talk show hosts, and assorted teabaggers to falsely equate President Obama and any one else they don't like with Adolf Hitler and the rest of his murderous Nazi horde.
The author of the post isn't without any background in the subject. Here's what he writes:

I think I know a fair bit about Nazis. All four of my grandparents were survivors of the Holocaust, three of them the sole survivors from their own very large families. My mother's parents met in Auschwitz shortly before liberation; my father's parents met in a displaced persons camp not long after the war ended. They all eventually made their way to safety and freedom in the Milwaukee area. And I have had more than my fair share of confrontations with contemporary Nazis, some of which I wrote about here -- note that my antagonists in the incidents recounted there are the very profile of the teabagger base.

The author then defines what is Nazi and what is not and ends his piece with this passage:

Responsible members of the press will remember these facts and deny the liars their platform. That means that when someone like Jim DeMint, the wingnut Senator from South Carolina, claims that allowing the uninsured to buy vouchers with TARP money would decrease the number of uninsured without costing the taxpayers anything, he will be exposed for the buffoon he is. It means that when Republican House leaders John Boehner and Thaddeus McCotter claim the healthcare reform plan promotes euthanasia, they will be rebuked for attempting to defraud the American people. It means that when no one has proposed "death panels" as part of the healthcare reform plan, a liar like Sarah Palin who uses her parents and son as props to claim otherwise will be ridiculed like the Republican teabagger she is. (And who are we kidding, using Facebook to make a major policy statement?!? God, I hope Palin is the Teabag Party's nominee in 2012!)
So how about it, Republicans? Do you want to grow up, accept that you lost the election because, frankly, your "ideas" stunk the first time you tried them 50 years or more ago, and participate in rational discussion about one of our biggest problems as a nation? Or do you want to just reinforce your status as a fringe, regional, racist and otherwise bigoted party with a weird obsession with sexual imagery (e.g., "teabaggers" and the "Fuck you faggot. Suck my cock you pervert." kind of nonsense we see weekly in the Saturday hate mail-apalooza)?
And how about you, traditional media types? Do you want to rein in the inflammatory, offensive, obnoxious, sometimes criminally inciting rhetorical excesses of your more extremist, hypocritical members? Or do you want to continue to marginalize yourselves by defending them in the guise of the First Amendment while censoring those who oppose them?
On both accounts, don't worry. I know the chances of either group behaving responsibly are about the same as Harry Reid growing a spine. I won't be holding my breath.

After seeing that passage, I am more determined to see real health insurance reform pass and those on the right get even more marginalized with the more violent-tongued of them (examples: Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity) getting their media forums taken away from them.

Are Teabaggers' Lies Backfiring Or What?

When I arrived at my day job earlier today, little did I know I'd be hearing from a West Coast teabagger who was all too willing to rattle any myth she could think of against President Obama's healthcare proposal.
After stating how honorable she thought Texas Gov. Rick Perry was and how we need him in the White House, the West Coast teabagger started rattling off how evil she thought the healthcare proposal was.
For starters, the teabagger said, it would require the federal government to have access to our checking accounts. The teabagger then said the proposal would give preferred access to illegal aliens to our health care system.
Some lunacies, yeah. Did I think she had been drinking too much of that right-wing corporate Kool Aid when it came to the president's plan? Yes, definitely.
We've been hearing lots of scare stories about the proposal that either
a. not in the proposal at all or
b. exaggerated at best or made up at worst about what's in (or out) of the proposal.
You'd think that a side that was so convinced about the rightness of their position would take far more care about telling the truth about the proposal. But we have sadly learned, the truth is a very foreign subject for those wanting to defeat the proposal.
Happily, it now appears that the mainstream media (or at least some of it) is beginning to wise up to the healthcare reform opponents' lies and tactics, and I suspect it won't be long before the cry for real reform will be so huge Congress won't be able to resist (not even Blue Dogs or even Republicans).